PFRPG Cavalier/Oracle classes are up

[Remathilis]

I think the Oracle needs more curse options that don't involve physical disabilities. The blind oracle, lame prophet and so forth are great old archetypes, but if all or most of the curses are being cursed with a qualification under the Americans with Disabilities Act, I think it has some unfortunate implications as to the nature of disability. Haunted is a good one, but how about reviled or lonely or disbelieved?

Yeah, I love the flavor of the oracle, but the nature of the curses is a bit much? Deafness? That's harsh for an adventurer. Mute might have been easier to handle (beginning with all spells silent, and then growing to grant the oracle permanent comprehend languages, telepathy, and finally truespeak). I'd also like more non-physical curses as well.

Otherwise, I LOVE the flavor of the class.

 

[questing gm]

Am I the only one that finds it odd that the Cavalier doesn't get Mounted Combat as a free feat? The Sword Order Cavalier only gets it at 8th level.

 

[ruemere]

Two bits of opinion on Cavalier

It is everything martial class should be able to do:
1. Decent damage.
2. Abilities to support team.
3. No need for magic items to do extraordinary things.
4. 4 skills points per level.

It is also everything I dislike about "Knight" class from previous editions:
1. Focus and certain dependence on specific animal companion without special abilities to make it more manageable (Druid buffs, poke-mount summon).
2. Challenge ability - while it sounds nice to be able to do some damage in exchange for a penalty, it becomes problematic when party faces solo monsters.
3. Oaths represent something I abhor - roleplaying penalties yielding mechanical advantages. Actually, in case of power hungry players, they represent free excuses for not roleplaying characters.
4. Orders are additional subsystem with no guidance as to power levels of abilities. They are also setting specific - it would be much easier to create pool of powers assigned to levels and then list powers per order.

Summing it up: moving in the right direction, burdened with many additional issues. Recommendation: rework it to use vancian slot system with sorcerer like mechanic (use magic). To me, who tried similar things since 2nd ed, it is not acceptable at this moment.


About Oracle

It's something new. Could be problematic due to differences in divine spells (ability to spam numerous Hold Persons is a sign of great adaptability, but at the same time may yield serious balance issues since some cleric spells are balanced against their specialization - i.e. you do not memorize multiple copies due to their limited applicability).

Regards,
Ruemere

 

[Roman]

Both classes are very nice and I don't have any major quibbles with either. One thing that needs some elaborating, however, is what happens when the Oracle abandons his/her focus/religion. I guess the way to treat this would be the same as when a Cleric abandons his religion, but it needs to be specified in the final version. Perhaps the lapsed Oracle might be able to find another focus if accepted by a different set of deities...

Cavalier is also a very nice class. If I were to make any suggestions, I would perhaps replace some of the bonus feats with other abilities to further differentiate him from the Fighter. Some candidate abilities would be a free leadership feat and a bonus to the leadership score.

 

[humble minion]

I confess myself a little underwhelmed to be honest.

The Cavalier seems passably solid for what it does (any mounted combat character absolutely needs a special mount to be viable at higher levels, and it's good to see Paizo acknowledge this). It's still fairly specialised though - the Cavalier is going to be want to be mounted all the time, which makes dungeons difficult and frustrating and certain other environments an issue. Perhaps a genuine non-rogue swashbuckler would have been a better option for this niche? The cavalier could have imho been completely replaced by a couple of feat chains for the benefit of the fighter and/or paladin with no great loss.

Also, is the Cavalier the 'alternate alignment paladin' we've been hearing about, or is that yet to come?

I found the Oracle disappointing - I guess I was expecting 'domain specialist' who accumulated weird themed powers related to their focus and had a cleric domains or two as an afterthought, rather than a 'divine sorceror' whose main tools are the same spells than any old cleric gets. Still, in retrospect I can see perfectly well how expecting the introduction of a zillion new powers was simply unrealistic from a page-count point of view. A few new focii and I might be able to get more into it. Love the idea of some of the curses being less physical and more metaphysical though.

I dunno, it just seems a tad unexciting on the whole. Just more ways of getting very similar abilities. Maybe the witch and/or alchemist will do it for me.

 

[MadMaxim]

I have only looked at the Cavalier so far, but I think that this is the way the Knight from 3.5 Player's Handbook II should have looked like, and with a good Fortitude save instead of Will. The challenge could do horrible amounts of damage to a solo monster, but I guess it's up to the GM to make sure that the party isn't just fighting one big bad guy.

 

[jreyst]

Just a random note for anyone concerned: Both the Cavalier and Oracle will be available on d20pfsrd.com this Friday. They had already been added to the site but I took them offline by request from Jason for 2 weeks so they can more accurately track/count downloads.

 

[Hrothgar Rannúlfr]

The cavalier could have imho been completely replaced by a couple of feat chains for the benefit of the fighter and/or paladin with no great loss.

ABSOLUTELY TRUE!

And, that's all a cavalier should be: A fighter or paladin with the right feats. I don't think the class features as presented in the playtest document are worthy of being a new class. Nor should a fighter or paladin need to multiclass to get such abilities.

So far, I see no justification for having a cavalier class. I'd much rather see feats that could allow a fighter or paladin to gain the skills expected of a cavalier.

I do like the oracle, so far, though.

 

[TroyXavier]

People do seem to desire a huge amount of feats over more base classes. I find that interesting.

 

[fuindordm]

Between the cavalier and the knight, I prefer the knight--but they're about equal in terms of effectiveness and problems.

I'm familiar with what people don't like about the knight, it's just not an issue for me. The cavalier's challenge mechanic looks better mechanically, but less interesting from a RP perspective.

I agree the oaths are a bit odd and fiddly, and I think players will shy away from any class that is dependent on a mount.

The oracle is very nice, I think--much better than the favored soul. I really like the idea of a class for crippled characters. The first thing I thought of was putting together a character based on the Fisher King archetype--permanently wounded, but still a sort of divine champion. I think it's very much in character for many religions to mark their representatives in such a way.

Ben